Talk:Syrian Americans

(Redirected from Talk:Syrian American)
Latest comment: 6 days ago by PurdueGrad29 in topic Wiki Education assignment: Political Parties
Former good articleSyrian Americans was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 12, 2007Good article nomineeListed
February 27, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 29, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the earliest Syrian immigrants in the United States (pictured) arrived in the 1880s?
Current status: Delisted good article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

edit

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chrysoberyl.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 August 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): IssaAboudi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Paul Anka is Canadian

edit

so why is he on this list? Also his own entry states he is of Lebanese ancestry

Anka's father is American Syrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moußsa (talkcontribs) 17:22, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Rename suggestion

edit
Done. Nishkid64 had moved it. —Anas talk? 07:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Successful good article nomination

edit

I am glad to say that this article which was nominated for good article status has succeeded. This is how the article, as of June 12, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:   -- Article reads well, understandable, good language usage overall.
2. Factually accurate?:   -- Article is sourced to an impressive (54) citations, with additional references to (7) WP:RS sources. Good job with referencing!
3. Broad in coverage?:   -- Very thorough, broad in scope. Article covers multiple topics, and addresses them well. However, see also comments below as article moves along in increased quality.
4. Neutral point of view?:   --Again, good use of language, NPOV tone overall.
5. Article stability?   -- Check of the talk page and edit history shows article stability.
6. Images?:   -- Good use of images, (12) images all appear to be free-use.

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status. — Smee 07:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Points towards improving quality further...
  • There are some little subsections and paragraphs that should either be expanded further, or merged. E.g. - "Post-1965"
  • The intro should be a little bit more comprehensive of a summary of the entire article, and broken up into at least three, or maybe four, paragraphs.
  • The infobox is very nice, but it is a touch too wide, and breaks up into the intro.
  • Move images that are free-use but located on Wikipedia, to the WikiCommons.

Smee 07:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC).Reply

Thanks, mate. (Message left in reviewer's talk page.) —Anas talk? 20:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh, sorry, one last point, which is just that after some of the other above points are addressed, which should be fairly easy, a Wikipedia:Peer Review might be helpful to get some further pointers on the way to FA... Smee 08:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC).Reply

Conscription

edit

Hey what's up Anas,

I've been trying to edit this very beautiful and well-researched article for ages!!!But I kept on getting afflicated with this "lazy" syndrome...anyways can you check your sources regarding Ottoman conscription of Christians, because this has not come up with my research..the Ottomans mostly conscripted poor muslims...muslims from notable families did not join the ottoman army..Christians had to pay the jizeyea tax..


and then you mention a "religious conflict" that took place in 1960's Syria..that's very interesting!!...this religious conflict was between who? Are you talking about Syrian state discrimination against the extremely tiny Jewish community?? George Al-Shami (talk) 03:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC) George Al-ShamiReply

Unfortunately, I do not have any of the printed sources I used when I wrote this article. If you have any reliable sources that contradict any statements in this article, feel free to present them here for discussion. And don't worry about it, we've all been there; look at me, I've been practically inactive for over half a year. :) Cheers, Anas talk? 01:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA Reassessment

edit
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Syrian American/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Checking against GA criteria

edit

  To uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of February 27, 2010, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    However, much of the Syrian traditions have diminished with time, mainly due to the fast pace of life in America which encourages individual independence. looks like POV
    The lead should summarise the whole article as per WP:LEAD
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    I repaired seven dead links and tagged one [1] using WP:CHECKLINKS.
    Assume good faith for off-line sources.
    I have added citation needed tags where needed
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    Just a few issues above to be addressed, major contributors and projects will be notified, on hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
    No progress made in seven days so delisting from GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Religion

edit

Both the Ernest McCarus and Alixia Naff sources say that the early Syrian immigrant were majority Christian and minority Muslim, no one says that there was a Jewish minority, so can anyone provide an accessible source or quotation from the inaccessible and inconsistent "A Community of Many Worlds: Arab Americans in New York City, Museum of the City of New York/Syracuse University Press, 2002" source about this. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Syrian Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

  Confirmed as correct. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Adding new info

edit

I'll be taking this page on a bit, I'm mostly focusing on pre-1965 at the moment but I think it could use a major update and will try to incorporate more contemporary sources soon. Owlsmcgee (talk) 00:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Political Parties

edit

  This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 5 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Corderob123 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by PurdueGrad29 (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply